1. Can newly discovered material evidence which revealed an unauthorized
communication had with a deliberating jury, in the jury room, by/or through a
Baihff, in violation of a Petitioner 's 6th and 14th Amendment rights under the
United States Constitution during a critical stage of the criminal proceedings:
a) rise to the level of a Brady violation where said communication was
suppressed by the state?
b) or - if such intrusion does not qualify as a Brady violation - does the state 's
willful suppression of all evidence pertaining to said communication absolved a
prisoner from showing that he could not have discovered the evidence by
reasonable diligence?

2. Where, under a state 's constitution, a convicted defendant is entitled to a direct
appeal as of right: does a Brady violation occur where newly discovered material
evidence clearly establishes that an omission of evidence in the trial transcript
prevented a defendant-appellant from addressing a reversible misconduct on
direct appeal with a supporting record?

3. Is Due Process, under the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution,
offended when a state applies res judicata to a claim supported by newly
discovered material evidence that was either unknown, or previously made
unavailable by the state, to the prisoner during direct appeal?

Can newly discovered material evidence revealing an unauthorized communication with a deliberating jury violate a defendant's constitutional rights and constitute a Brady violation when suppressed by the state?